Lot 54 D 423
The Special Assistant for Occupied Areas in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Hamblen) to the Deputy to the Consultant (Allison)
Subject: Comments on Reply to Soviet Note1 on Japanese Treaty
1. Thank you very much for the opportunity to view the proposed reply2 to the Soviet note on the Japanese peace treaty.
2. I have comments on two portions. On page 9, I suggest that the sentence which begins on line 10 be amended so as to eliminate the remainder of the sentence after the word “possess” and substitute so [Page 1041] that the sentence would read “The United States contemplates that this arrangement would accept the principle that Japan should not possess military forces which would become an offensive threat against any state”.3
3. The reason for the change is the lack of agreement as to what is offensive armament. We might well agree to the possession of combat aircraft by Japan. Such a plane might be considered a threat. However if the overall organization and strength of the Japanese forces was such as to preclude offensive action from Japan, she could not be rightly accused of being a threat to any other country.
4. On page 10, I suggest that the last sentence of the first paragraph be amended so as to read “Such arrangement, as contemplated by the United Nations Charter, would carry no offensive threat”.4
5. The reason for the proposed change is that I can easily conceive a situation whereby the United States might wish to use Japan as a base under conditions whereby Japan’s security was not readily recognized as being involved. If the Chinese Communists or the Soviet navies or air forces should attack the United States Seventh fleet or any other U.S. military force outside of Japan we would undoubtedly retaliate by use of U.S. forces stationed in Japan. Such use of U.S. forces might be considered as not “purely for the security of Japan”.
Brigadier General, GSC Coordinator
- For texts of the Soviet note of May 7 regarding a Japanese peace treaty and the U.S. reply of May 19 (released to the press May 20), see Department of State Bulletin, May 28, 1951, p. 852.↩
- General Hamblen refers here to a draft of May 15. (Lot 54 D 423)↩
- The draft mentioned in footnote 2 above reads: “The United States contemplates that this arrangement would accept the principle that Japan should not possess armament which could be an offensive threat.” The final version is as follows: “The United States Government contemplates that this arrangement would accept the principle that Japan should not possess military forces which could become an offensive threat.”↩
- The draft mentioned in footnote 2 above reads: “Such arrangement would be purely for the security of Japan, as contemplated by the United Nations Charter, and would carry no offensive threat.” The final version is as follows: “Such arrangement would carry no offensive threat.”↩